View/Open

Date

Author

Metadata

Abstract

English: Background: One of the challenges associated with Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) is finding the appropriate method of identifying motor difficulties. Motor proficiency tests are used to identify children with motor difficulties; however, it seems that questionnaire-based assessments may be more practical for screening purposes. The Movement Assessment Battery for Children Checklist (MABC-Checklist) has been used as a screening tool to identify motor difficulties in children especially when completed by parents and teachers. Although parents and teachers can identify children with motor difficulties using screening tools, it is still not clear which screening test is the best to use. The original MABC-Checklist (1992) was revised in 2007 and research available on the revised edition (MABC-Checklist-2) is limited indicating that more studies on the MABC-Checklist-2 when completed by parents and teachers are needed.
Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine the agreement between identifying motor difficulties with the Movement Assessment Battery for Children second edition Performance Test (MABC-2) and the identifying of motor difficulties with the MABC-Checklist-2 when completed by (i) their parents as well as (ii) their teachers.
Methods: This study was done using sampling data and a quantitative research method (i.e. questionnaire). Three-hundred and twenty three learners in Grade 1 between the ages of 5 and 8 years participated in this study. The study consists of n=140 boys (43%) and n=183 girls (57%) of various ethnic groups, which consisted of n=193 Caucasian (59.75%, 6.5 years, SD=0.55), n=120 Black (37.15%, 6.2 years, SD=0.4), n=9 Mixed race (2.79%, 6.4 years, SD=0.5) and n=1 Hispanic (0.31%). A total of three hundred and twenty three parents (n=323) and twenty three teachers (n=23) also took part in the study. The MABC-2 Performance Test was used to determine motor difficulties and DCD in the children. The MABC-Checklist-2 was used by the parents and teachers to identify children with and without motor difficulties. The total test score results of the MABC-2 Performance Test were compared with the total test score results of the MABC-Checklist-2 completed by the parents and teachers. Data from the questionnaires were captured electronically by the researcher on a data form using Microsoft Excel. Further analysis was done by a statistician using SAS Version 9.2. Frequencies and percentages were calculated for categorical data. Medians and percentiles were calculated for numerical data. The measure of agreement with help from the Kappa (k)-coefficient were used to explore the aim. The coefficient is known as the Cohen’s Kappa and it measures inter-judge agreement.
Results: The results indicated that out of the 47 children identified with motor difficulties (moderate motor difficulties, n=21, and severe motor difficulties, n=26) by the MABC-2 Performance Test, 15 of these children were also identified with motor difficulties (moderate motor difficulties, n=2; and severe motor difficulties, n=13) by the parent completed MABC-Checklist-2 indicating a sensitivity of 31.9% (15/47). With regard to specificity there were 276 children identified with no motor difficulties with the MABC-2 Performance Test, whereas 197 (71.4%) of these children were also identified without motor difficulties with the MABC-Checklist-2 completed by the parents. Therefore, the specificity between the MABC-2 Performance Test and the parent completed MABC-Checklist-2 was 71.4% (197/276). The (k)-coefficient of 0.143 indicated that only 14.3% agreement between the two assessments were present after correcting for chance and show that the agreement of the two assessments is not high when completed by parents.
Results with regard to the teachers indicated that out of the 47 children identified by the MABC-2 Performance Test with motor difficulties (moderate motor difficulties, n=21; and severe motor difficulties, n=24), 16 of these children were also identified with motor difficulties (moderate motor difficulties, n=4; and severe motor difficulties, n=12) by the teacher that completed the MABC-Checklist-2 indicating a sensitivity of 35.6% (16/45). When analysing the specificity there was 276 children identified with no motor difficulties using the MABC-2 Performance Test whereas 193 (72.6%) of these children were also identified with no motor difficulties by the MABC-Checklist-2 completed by teachers. Therefore the specificity between the MABC-2 Performance Test and the teacher completed MABC-Checklist-2 is 72.6% (193/266). The (k)-coefficient of 0.161 reveal that only 16.1% agreement between the two assessments were present after correcting for chance and reveal that the agreement between the two assessments is low when completed by teachers.
Conclusion: Several screening tests and questionnaires have been developed to gather information with regard to motor performance of children specifically from parents and teachers. However, studies using parents’ and teachers’ reports as well as the results in this study have produced conflicting results, thus it is still not clear which screening test is the best to use and whether parents and teachers both need to be used to screen a child.